Bandman writes "My business just purchased a couple dozen blades, and with our existing servers, this brings us to around 60 machines. We're geographically dispersed, and most of the users who need to connect to servers are not technical (if that matters).
We used to use theme-based naming schemes, but we've been migrating to a more utilitarian system. I think it's clearer and more concise, but I've had some feedback from users who didn't find it understandable.
What do you use for your internal DNS schemes? How big is your network, and what do you recommend for future expansion? Does it matter to your users at all?" Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
I've done some blade work, and blades are supposed to be interchangeable in most cases. Use CNAME's for their function, use a rack name and slot number for the blade, and label them consistently.
Keeping your hardware associated with asset tracking and system monitoring is just aggravated by having overly clever names. Using a consistent reference name style can save quite a lot of work, whether it's for blades, printers, or desktops.
Name the blades by the blade server (Score:2)
I've done some blade work, and blades are supposed to be interchangeable in most cases. Use CNAME's for their function, use a rack name and slot number for the blade, and label them consistently.
Keeping your hardware associated with asset tracking and system monitoring is just aggravated by having overly clever names. Using a consistent reference name style can save quite a lot of work, whether it's for blades, printers, or desktops.